I received a gift from my parents for Christmas!!!!!!! (Although I clearly sent them the Bol.com link myself, but that's beside the point).

As T. W. Adorno said: “To understand Endgame can only mean understanding why it cannot be understood.”

Hamm: [Pause.] Why do you stay with me?

Clove: Why do you keep me?

Hamm: There’s no one else.

Clove: There’s nowhere else.

[Pause.]

Hamm: Yesterday! What does that mean? Yesterday!

Clove: [Violently.] That means that bloody awful day, long ago, before this bloody awful day.

The gift from my parents on Christmas is truly a wonderful thing. It shows their love and care for me. And the words from T. W. Adorno make me think deeply about the nature of understanding. In the dialogue between Hamm and Clov, we can sense the complex relationship and the sense of hopelessness and dependence. The mention of yesterday also brings a sense of nostalgia and a contrast to the present. Overall, these elements combine to create a rich and thought-provoking scene.

The End of the Game

Samuel Beckett

The author was born in Dublin, Ireland in 1906 and died in Paris, France in 1989. He is a playwright, critic, and poet who won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1969. He belongs to the experimental movement and the Theater of the Absurd and was one of the most influenced by James Joyce and follows the trend of the new French novel...


The play can be considered a tragicomedy full of despair and suffering, like most of Beckett's similar works. The play is so intense that some have linked it as a trilogy with "Waiting for Godot", the silent play. Some of his most famous novels translated into Arabic are "Molloy", "Malone Dies", and "Murphy".



In my opinion, every successful and realistic play with the elements of the theater is a great work. Because in the frozen elements of time and place, the measure of success is related to the dialogue, the characters, and their movements in line with the movement of the events. And within these limitations, it is necessary to intensify the messages through the simplest details, the most accurate expressions, and the movements...


The play consists of one act and one scene that progresses straightforwardly. If we assume that it is in the events or their development in the midst of the abundant chaos towards the dialogues that revolve around a kind of nihilistic philosophy between four characters. Hamm is a blind man who can neither hear nor see. In the room where he is, there are two windows and two large ash bins in which his father and mother (Nagg and Nell) live. The fourth character is Clov, a servant whose name is Clov. He serves Hamm and obeys his orders in a strange way until he is amazed by it and asks himself more than once about the secret of his absolute obedience to Hamm, but he seems as miserable as the other characters and has no other place to go...


The main idea in the play is the idea of zero, which is repeated literally and practically throughout the events of the play. Even when Clov goes out to the yard to bring Hamm a picture of the outside world, he tells him that he sees zero... The play is wonderful because it does not deviate from the central idea. On the contrary, all the scenes converge on the core of the idea. Even the attempts of the old couple to accept each other when their heads come out of the ash bins are absurd to the extreme, especially when Nagg complains that he has lost one of his teeth during the night... Then there is a second scene that raises profound questions. When Hamm asks his son to listen to his story, he demands that he give him a stuffed bean, but he refuses and says that there is only a biscuit in it. Then he takes his biscuit and goes back and closes the lid of the ash bin... In another scene, more absurd, Hamm asks Clov to open the bins and see what his father and mother have done. Clov obeys, and when he opens them, he says that Nell is dead and Nagg is eating his biscuit...

Despite the limitations of the place, the events, and the characters, Beckett was able to ingeniously put forward or as they say, put a moral in the reader's eye and force him to have a dialogue with himself and argue with it, and he may enter into states of profound silence because one scene exposes all of his life and makes him review it completely.

I have a particular preference for Godot. However, if I had come across this work prior to Godot, there's a good chance I would have favored this one instead.

But then again, the future Eneko might hold a different opinion.

At the moment, I'm filled with anticipation for tomorrow, eager to discover how one goes about writing an opera. It's an exciting prospect that leaves me on the edge of my seat, wondering what new insights and experiences await.

The idea of delving into the world of opera composition is both thrilling and daunting, but I'm ready to embrace the challenge and see where it takes me.

Who knows what wonderful creations I might come up with? Only time will tell.

Lê-se em pouco mais de uma hora, mas fica colado à pele; um dia, uma semana, uma vida. Beckett não se esquece. Assim como não se esquece a inquietação que as suas peças provocam: a confusão de sentimentos, o vazio, a angústia…porque leva-nos ao limite, faz-nos rir e sabemos que não era para rir, era para chorar, caramba! Era para gritar!

It can be read in just over an hour, but it sticks to the skin; for a day, a week, a lifetime. Beckett is not forgotten. Just as the unease that his plays provoke is not forgotten: the confusion of emotions, the emptiness, the anguish... because it takes us to the limit, makes us laugh and we know that it was not for laughing, it was for crying, damn it! It was for screaming!

Foi a peça mais sombria que li de Samuel Beckett. Agora, é apanhar os cacos e tentar restaurar a ruína emocional. It was the darkest play that I read of Samuel Beckett. Now, it is to pick up the pieces and try to restore the emotional ruin.

I really can't explain why I liked this play because it was completely contrary to the things I usually like. The infinite chaos, the unclear beginning, the unclear end, the strange and bizarre dialogues and the confusion of everything are all the things that drive me crazy. But here, no

I read this confusion with interest until the last word, and the discussion we had about it in the book club made everything better. I hadn't studied the play before reading it so that my mind could be open and I could imagine freely. But the fact that I later realized in the discussions that the main theme is disability was very interesting to me

In my opinion, the less said about the subject of the play, the better. One has to go blindly towards it and flounder in its confusion

The Telegram channel for reviews and downloads of books and their audios
Maede's Books

Delayed review
13th of November, 2023

Beckett's entire body of work is known as "the theater of the absurd."

His plays are presented within a single room in a single act, filled with dialogues and conversations. We truly know very little else. We don't know the background of the situation or the characters, nor do we know exactly where we are located. There is no beginning or end, and it's not a story with a conclusion. It's simply a situation that is presented to us, and this is something novel and interesting.

I don't think it was the best book to start with this author, but it was interesting to me. By researching through external means, I was able to analyze his work a little better. I can only say that it is a peculiar and interesting work. Those are the words I would use to define it. I am interested in learning more about the author's work in order to better understand it.

I absolutely love reading Beckett. Even though I often feel a bit stupid by the end of the reading, wondering if I've really understood everything. I'm sure I haven't. But ultimately, what's the main thing when reading a book? It's to have pleasure, isn't it? And even if I don't grasp everything, as long as it's entertaining and I understand a part of it, that's fine with me.

HAMM. - In my house. (A pause. Prophetically and with voluptuousness.) One day you will be blind. Like me. You will be sitting somewhere, small and completely lost in the void, forever, in the dark. Like me. (A pause.) One day you will say to yourself, I'm tired, I'm going to sit down, and you will go and sit down. Then you will say to yourself, I'm hungry, I'm going to get up and make myself something to eat. But you won't get up. You will say to yourself, I was wrong to sit down, but since I've sat down I'm going to stay sitting a little longer, then I'll get up and make myself something to eat. But you won't get up and you won't make yourself something to eat. (A pause.) You will look at the wall a little, then you will say to yourself, I'm going to close my eyes, maybe sleep a little, after that it will be better, and you will close them. And when you open them again there will be no more wall. (A pause.) The infinity of the void will be around you, all the dead of all time resurrected would not fill it, you will be like a little grain of sand in the middle of the steppe. (A pause.) Yes, one day you will know what it is, you will be like me, except that you will have no one, because you will have had pity on no one and there will be no one left to have pity on.

(Read as part of the Shiny Spring Challenge 2024, categories Spring at the Museum - First days of Spring - Dali - an absurd novel & Spring around the World - The equinox at Teotihuacan - a white novel)

I usually don't have a great fondness for plays. I often find them a bit dull and uninteresting. However, holy fuck, this particular play was some really good shit!

From the moment the curtains opened, I was completely captivated. The actors' performances were outstanding. Their emotions were so raw and真实 that it felt as if I was actually a part of the story.

The plot was engaging and full of twists and turns. It kept me on the edge of my seat throughout the entire show. I couldn't wait to see what would happen next.

The set design was also top-notch. It added to the overall atmosphere of the play and made it even more immersive.

In conclusion, this play was a pleasant surprise. It completely changed my perception of plays and made me realize that there are some truly amazing ones out there.

I read this in English, for my British Lit class this semester.

I thought I should actually start reading the assignments, and I read this after reading The Power and the Glory and Regeneration.

My professor said this piece would be slow moving, and he said something about it not really having a plot, but I could see one if I squinted. I actually really enjoyed this piece. And because I took notes on it for my class, I have a lot to say.

One of the biggest things is, obviously, that it represents a chess game, even by the title. I'm not a chess player, nor do I know chess language, but my professor explained most of it (the title, how Clov moves around the step ladder at some points is like moving chess pieces, and how Nell & Nagg's faces are very white, while Clov's and Hamm's are very red). I know that sometimes chess can be a little slow moving, like life seems to be for these characters (and like the play itself). It ties in nicely with the chess theme.

There were a few parts that I found very humorous for no apparent reason. It's more ironic because these characters contemplate laughing a few times throughout the play, but never actually do. There are three things I found funny. Hamm says "Sit on him!" and Clov replies "I can't sit." Then Hamm says "True. And I can't stand." I found myself smirking when I read that part. Another somewhat humorous part was when Hamm said "lick your neighbor as yourself," which is a parody of the saying "love your neighbor." The other funny part was when Nagg was giving his speech to Hamm about his boyhood and he said, "...we let you cry. Then we moved you out of earshot, so that we might sleep in peace." That part is just so odd.

The plot I saw if I squinted was just them basically waiting around to die. My professor said the setting in this reminded him "of a nursing home where the patients are just waiting to die." And then he said that he can just picture Samuel Beckett standing behind him whispering, "so are we." Life is always dying, and most of us are just waiting for it. On the first page, Clov says something is "finished, it's finished, nearly finished, it must be nearly finished." I feel like he's talking about his life. A few pages later, Hamm cries out that it must nearly be finished too, and then asks Clov if "this thing" has gone on long enough - it really feels like they're waiting for death.

Another thing that was pointed out by my professor is the fact that Clov and Hamm discuss the fact that this is a play. On one page Clov asks what there is to keep him around, and Hamm replies with "the dialogue." On another page, Hamm says that there'll "be no more speech" and "it's time for his story" as if he had thumbed ahead in the script. On the last page of the play, when Hamm is talking, he pauses a lot and I got the feeling that he was almost reading from a script. Hamm always seems to be the one who brings up the script, and coincidentally the word "ham" means bad actor, according to my professor. So I found that interesting.

The whole thing represents the deterioration of humanity, I think. We have four characters in this piece - Hamm, who can't stand up and who is blind; Clov, who can't sit down and limps; Nagg, who is going deaf; and Nell, who only has stumps for legs. That just further points out the theme of just waiting around to die. A quote that really stuck out to me was "the end is in the beginning and yet you go on." Overall, I found the concept/theme really interesting, and I'm glad I decided to read it.

"I have never been there.
Always, absent.
Everything happened without me."

This simple yet profound statement reflects a sense of detachment and perhaps a hint of longing. It makes one wonder about the circumstances that led to this feeling of being constantly absent. Maybe there were missed opportunities, important events that took place while the person was away. It could also imply a sense of isolation or not being part of something significant. The repetition of "عبث x عبث x عبث" adds an element of mystery or perhaps frustration. It could be a way of expressing the confusion or turmoil that the person is experiencing. Overall, this short passage evokes a complex range of emotions and leaves the reader with much to ponder.

My favorite parts:

1. The comedy of unhappiness

NELL - One mustn't laugh at these things, Nagg. Why do you always do that?
NAGG - Speak softly!
NELL - (without lowering her voice) There's nothing funnier than unhappiness, I grant you. But...
NAGG - (shocked) Oh!
NELL - Yes, yes, it's the funniest thing in the world. And it made us laugh, it made us laugh heartily, in the early days. But it's always the same thing. Yes, it's like a joke that's told too many times, it's still a good joke but it doesn't make us laugh anymore.

2. The senselessness of existence

HAMM - Clov!
CLOV - (irritated) What is it?
HAMM - Can it be that we... that we... have some meaning?
CLOV - A meaning! We a meaning! (Brief laugh) Ah, that's good!
HAMM - I wonder. (Pause.) Wouldn't an intelligence returned to earth be tempted to imagine things, from observing us? (Assuming the voice of the intelligence) Ah, here, I understand how it is, yes, I understand what they do! ([...] Normal voice) And without going so far, even we ourselves... (emotionally) ... we ourselves... at times... (Vehemently) And to think that all this may not have been in vain!

3. The boredom of existing

HAMM - Don't you think it's lasted long enough?
CLOV - Of course! (Pause.) What thing?
HAMM - This... this... thing.
CLOV - I've always thought so.

4. The curses and the non-existence of God

HAMM - [...] Let's pray to God. [...] Ready?
CLOV - (resigned) Ready.
HAMM - (to Nagg) And you?
NAGG - (joining his hands, closing his eyes, recites hastily) Our Father who art in heaven...
HAMM - Silence! In silence! Some dignity! Come on, let's begin. (Praying posture. Silence. Discouraged before the others) Well?
CLOV - (reopening his eyes) Absolute zero. And you?
HAGG - A hole in the water. (To Nagg) And you?
NAGG - Wait. (Pause. Reopening his eyes) A cabbage!
HAMM - What rubbish! He doesn't exist!

5. The desire for death, which is love of order

CLOV - [...] I love order. It's my dream. A world where everything is silent and motionless and every thing in its extreme place, under the extreme dust.

6. The words that come from the heart

HAMM - Something... that comes from your heart.
CLOV - From my heart!
HAMM - Some word... from your heart.
CLOV - (sings)
Vague little bird, fly to her
Hide among her breasts,
Tell her that I love her more than my eyes
And that I have my balls full.
(Pause) Is that enough?

But I swear to you that in reality I'm a very cheerful person, or at least I try!

Absurd theatre and existentialist literature have their own unique charm that may not be appreciated by everyone. However, for me, they hold a special allure. I'm not entirely sure why, but there's something about the themes and the sense of pointlessness (if that's the right word) that really speaks to me.

\\n  

“HAMM: We're not beginning to... to... mean something?
CLOV: Mean something! You and I, mean something!
(Brief laugh.) Ah that's a good one!”

\\n

I understand that some people might find the ideas presented in works like those of Beckett, such as Hamm's parents living in ash bins and Clov's inability to sit, really stupid. But for me, there's a certain charm in that very stupidity. It makes me think and question the nature of our existence.

\\n  

“Use your head, can't you, use your head, you're on earth, there's no cure for that!”

\\n

The entire concept of absurd theatre and existentialist lit just appeals to me on an intellectual level. It's strange because I wouldn't necessarily call myself an existentialist, but I do think that they pose interesting questions and make keen observations about life and its meaninglessness.

\\n  

“Nothing is funnier than unhappiness, I grant you that… Yes, yes, it's the most comical thing in the world. And we laugh, we laugh, with a will, in the beginning. But it's always the same thing. Yes, it's like the funny story we have heard too often, we still find it funny, but we don't laugh any more.”

\\n